The all-woman jury believed Wilson, finding the articles from Woman’s Day, Australian Women’s Weekly, NW and OK magazines were not substantially true and were likely to harm her.

Rebel Wilson ordered to repay $4.1m to Bauer Media after appeal

Read more

But the court of appeal found it couldn’t be proven Wilson missed out on film contracts as a result of the articles, which claimed she lied about her real name, age and childhood.

On Wednesday, Wilson’s lawyers lodged an application for special leave to appeal with Australia’s highest court.

If her application is successful, Wilson’s fight could end up in Canberra before a full bench of the high court.

In the 12-page application, $9,000-a-day barrister Matthew Collins QC, alongside fellow barrister Renee Enbom, argue the court of appeal made a number of errors, including that Wilson needed to prove economic loss after being fired from movie roles.

The court of appeal overturned supreme court justice John Dixon’s finding that Wilson’s career had been on an “upwards trajectory”, instead saying he had given “a picture of the plaintiff’s career trajectory that significantly overstated its success and ignored its hiccups”.

But Collins and Enbom will argue Justice Dixon was correct, and that he was also correct in finding the articles caused a “huge international media firestorm” affecting Wilson’s career and reputation.

They will also argue the court of appeal was wrong in concluding Wilson needed to prove economic loss by showing a project had been “taken off the shelf”.